Megaupload
Link broken getting fixed!
Link broken getting fixed!
Hotfile
Part 1 - 193.4 MB
Part 2 - 53.1 MB
Friday, April 30, 2010
milton twins TeensForCash4
Megaupload
Link broken getting fixed!
Link broken getting fixed!
Hotfile
Part 1 - 193.4 MB
Part 2 - 53.1 MB
It's not just BP's fault
By Creature
Rush Limbaugh would like to blame eco-terrorists for the heartbreaking disaster unfolding in the Gulf, but really he should look a bit closer to home (and his wallet). Can you say, Halliburton? I don't think Rush can.
Rush Limbaugh would like to blame eco-terrorists for the heartbreaking disaster unfolding in the Gulf, but really he should look a bit closer to home (and his wallet). Can you say, Halliburton? I don't think Rush can.
National ID
By Creature
Um, no:
Atrios: "Durbin's reasoning - hey, we've embraced other stupid identity verification schemes so we'll embrace another! - is just idiotic. It won't actually solve any problems. People will hate it regardless of ideology."
We should be stepping back from hysterics, not piling on. Ugh.
Um, no:
But Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.), who has worked on the proposal and helped unveil it at a press conference Thursday, predicted the public has become more comfortable with the idea of a national identification card.
“The biometric identification card is a critical element here,” Durbin said. “For a long time it was resisted by many groups, but now we live in a world where we take off our shoes at the airport and pull out our identification.
Atrios: "Durbin's reasoning - hey, we've embraced other stupid identity verification schemes so we'll embrace another! - is just idiotic. It won't actually solve any problems. People will hate it regardless of ideology."
We should be stepping back from hysterics, not piling on. Ugh.
Making sense in the City of Angels
Hopefully this is the start of a broader movement to isolate Arizona:
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said Thursday that he supports a boycott of Arizona by the city of Los Angeles, and he called that state's newly passed immigration law "unpatriotic and unconstitutional."
"No person should be treated differently in the eyes of the law," he said at a news conference.
The mayor said boycotts have worked in the past and cited the city's divestiture from South Africa in the 1980s to protest apartheid.
It's never good to be compared to apartheid South Africa, but... if the shoe fits...
Okay, Arizona isn't quite at that level, but I think Councilman Jose Huizar is right: "If you look like me, you should be concerned about traveling to the state of Arizona."
Consider the source
By Capt. Fogg
So how long did you think it would take? Actually I'm surprised that Chairman Rush took so long to blame the oil rig disaster on "hardcore environmentalist wackos." He couldn't have been waiting for some evidence before making accusations of murder and terrorism since there hasn't been any and he's never let that bother him before. Besides he isn't actually making any accusations in the first place:
It didn't take long either, for the "government can't be trusted" set to pledge their trust to the Arizona police never to define their "reasonable suspicion" in a way that lets them stop and harass American citizens of Hispanic origin or Hispanics with legal work papers. They don't have to worry at all, though they should be sure to have witnesses standing by, to never go out of the house without proof of citizenship and to be very, very polite to Sheriff Arpaio when he demands they stand and deliver.
There's simply no reason to worry about abuse except that the recently signed bill seems to have been drafted by Kris Kobach who is a lawyer from the Federation for American Immigration Reform , which the Southern Poverty Law Center has listed as an anti-immigrant hate group since 2007 and who was former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s top immigration adviser. Hey, I'm not suggesting anything, but Ashcroft isn't known for respecting the niceties of Constitutional law in matters concerning the Bill of Rights. So maybe it's constitutional, maybe it's not, maybe it's going to be hell for Hispanics in Arizona, maybe not, but I'll simply consider the source.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
So how long did you think it would take? Actually I'm surprised that Chairman Rush took so long to blame the oil rig disaster on "hardcore environmentalist wackos." He couldn't have been waiting for some evidence before making accusations of murder and terrorism since there hasn't been any and he's never let that bother him before. Besides he isn't actually making any accusations in the first place:
"I'm just, I'm just noting the timing here."It happened on Earth Day of course. It's always so easy to say "case closed" when there isn't any case so I won't even hint that Halliburton, the recipient of unholy amounts of government subsidies, grants and contracts and with strong ties to Dick Cheney is handling the capping of the well. I'll just note who's getting rich from it.
It didn't take long either, for the "government can't be trusted" set to pledge their trust to the Arizona police never to define their "reasonable suspicion" in a way that lets them stop and harass American citizens of Hispanic origin or Hispanics with legal work papers. They don't have to worry at all, though they should be sure to have witnesses standing by, to never go out of the house without proof of citizenship and to be very, very polite to Sheriff Arpaio when he demands they stand and deliver.
There's simply no reason to worry about abuse except that the recently signed bill seems to have been drafted by Kris Kobach who is a lawyer from the Federation for American Immigration Reform , which the Southern Poverty Law Center has listed as an anti-immigrant hate group since 2007 and who was former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s top immigration adviser. Hey, I'm not suggesting anything, but Ashcroft isn't known for respecting the niceties of Constitutional law in matters concerning the Bill of Rights. So maybe it's constitutional, maybe it's not, maybe it's going to be hell for Hispanics in Arizona, maybe not, but I'll simply consider the source.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
Iran selected for U.N. Commission on the Status of Women
This is where I don't mind quoting Fox News, because it was right to focus on this appalling development:
Without fanfare, the United Nations this week elected Iran to its Commission on the Status of Women, handing a four-year seat on the influential human rights body to a theocratic state in which stoning is enshrined in law and lashings are required for women judged "immodest."
Just days after Iran abandoned a high-profile bid for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, it began a covert campaign to claim a seat on the Commission on the Status of Women, which is "dedicated exclusively to gender equality and advancement of women," according to its website.
Buried 2,000 words deep in a U.N. press release distributed Wednesday on the filling of "vacancies in subsidiary bodies," was the stark announcement: Iran, along with representatives from 10 other nations, was "elected by acclamation," meaning that no open vote was requested or required by any member states -- including the United States.
I'm not anti-U.N., I'm really not, but is it any wonder it has a credibility problem? And is it any wonder so many people, in particular in the U.S., consider it a joke, if not something far more malevolent?
How can it possibly justify putting Iran on this commission? Did some countries go along with this because it further undermines the U.N? Or is it just that too many countries don't care? Or that too many countries are, like Iran, anything but liberal and democratic and respectful of women's rights?
Palin (hearts) Beck
There's really no point commenting on Sarah Palin's short piece on Glenn Beck for Time's "Leaders" feature, but humour me while I post a few quotes:
"Glenn's like the high school government teacher so many wish they'd had, charting and connecting ideas with chalk-dusted fingers -- kicking it old school..."
-- Kicking it old school? Did Palin outsource this piece to a 14-year old? And if Beck's a teacher, he'd fit in best at a Cambodian re-education camp, I think. We remember Jon Stewart's utter dismantling of Beck and his chalkboard, do we not?
"Glenn, 46, tackles topics other news shows would regard as arcane."
-- You know, like from when people thought the earth was flat. And of course he does it all with an ignorance one can only call medieval.
"Consider his desire to teach Americans about the history of the progressive movement: he's doing to progressive what Ronald Reagan did to liberal -- explaining that it's a damaged brand."
-- If Palin dislikes progressivism so much, she should give up her right to vote and send her kids off to work 16-hour days at a factory in Manchester.
"His love of the Founding Fathers inspires others to learn and respect our nation's history."
-- This is where I wish I could pull in the Founding Fathers and have them give Beck and Palin a smackdown, like Woody Allen did in Annie Hall with Marshall McLuhan.
"Best of all, Glenn delights in driving the self-proclaimed powers-that-be crazy."
-- Sure, because it's impossible to engage rationally with him. And how are you supposed to have any sort of meaningful interaction with someone who essentially denies reason?
"Even his critics (whom he annihilates in ratings) have to admire his amazing ability to galvanize everyday Americans to better themselves and peacefully engage their government."
-- Well, he does do very well, that's true, but there's nothing I admire about him. Galvanizing people by adding to their abject ignorance and bigotry isn't anything admirable.
And that goes for Palin, too.
Smartest Republican of the Day: Connie Mack
We don't hand out an SRD all that often -- I mean, it's not like there are all that many candidates on any given day -- but let's give some credit today to Rep. Connie Mack of Florida:
Rep. Connie Mack (R-Fla.) ripped into the new Arizona immigration law today, comparing it to Nazi Germany.
"This law of 'frontier justice' – where law enforcement officials are required to stop anyone based on 'reasonable suspicion' that they may be in the country illegally – is reminiscent of a time during World War II when the Gestapo in Germany stopped people on the street and asked for their papers without probable cause," Mack said in a statement.
"This is not the America I grew up in and believe in, and it’s not the America I want my children to grow up in," he added.
Very well put. And so un-Republican of him (which makes him our SRD).
Yes, other Republicans have spoken out, if far more mildly, against the Arizona law. As I blogged the other day, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Karl Rove, three fairly high-profile Republicans, all have problems with it. But the overwhelming reaction among Republicans and conservatives, including Bill Kristol and George Will, is full and enthusiastic support for it.
Yes, other Republicans have spoken out, if far more mildly, against the Arizona law. As I blogged the other day, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and Karl Rove, three fairly high-profile Republicans, all have problems with it. But the overwhelming reaction among Republicans and conservatives, including Bill Kristol and George Will, is full and enthusiastic support for it.
Suffice it to say that Mack's statement is a breath of fresh air, a defence of freedom against fascism, and just the sort of responsible, intelligent comment one finds so rarely these days in the GOP.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Andrea Mitchell, ignoramus extraordinaire
Appearing on MSNBC's Morning Joe yesterday, Alan Greenspan's wife called Nick Clegg, the leader of Britain's Liberal Democratic Party, "very anti-American on the subject of Iraq, Afghanistan, and engagement." She also claimed that he opposes Britain's "special relationship" with the U.S. and is a Euroskeptic.
Thankfully, former NSA Zbigniew Brzezinski was there to refute her ignorant (or intentionally misleading) comments. Clegg may be anti-war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but so are many Americans. Far from opposing the "special relationship," he desires, as Think Progress explains, "a positive, strong and even uniquely warm relationship with the United States." And he's not a Euroskeptic at all, as he supports Britain's close engagement with "a strong Europe." Indeed, if anyone's a Euroskeptic, it's David Cameron, leader of the Conservatives.
Now, Prime Minister Gordon Brown, clinging to power by a thread, has also called Clegg anti-American, but we can write that off as political desperation (and the usual sort of political campaign dishonesty), I think. With Mitchell, one cannot help but wonder if her smears of Clegg derive from her right-leaning tendencies, if I may put it nicely.
Crist and convenience (according to Rubio)
You're right, Marco Rubio, to a point. It is indeed "political convenience" that has driven Charlie Crist from the GOP, compelling him to run against you as an independent in this year's Senate race.
But it's also much more than that, and this is where you're wrong. Ideas, principles, and ideology do come into play. Why, after all, is it now convenient for Crist not to run as a Republican? Because the Republican Party has been taken over by extremists like you and your teabagging pals, because you, and those like you, have effectively driven Crist, and those like him, from your party.
Look, I have no love for Crist. I'd welcome him as a Democrat, I suppose, and there are many Democrats like him in the party, but, for the most part, I do not share his views and prefer that Democrats choose real Democrats, broadly speaking, to run as Democrats.
Desert Cross
By Capt. Fogg
What Judge Tony is saying here is that they don't matter, they don't deserve to matter; don't deserve the dignity of being buried without alien iconography. What America is hearing is that we can't spare a dime for Public TV but putting up and maintaining Christian symbols on public property is public duty because the United States of America would really be the Christian States of America God wants it to be if we hadn't allowed those people in.
Once again we have been made aware of how precarious is our freedom of conscience, our freedom from interference in our private beliefs and our right to be included as Americans in a state that is under relentless religious pressure to be exclusive. We have a Court willing, it seems, to reevaluate and revisit many things we thought were decided and that would be a great many things indeed if next year's Court leaned more heavily toward giving our government a more religious stance when it comes to matters of morality. We can expect some serious fervor surrounding the next appointment. If you value religious freedom and indeed if you value religion itself, maybe now's the time to pray.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
"The Constitution does not oblige government to avoid any public acknowledgment of religion's role in society"said Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. The Cross may be an affirmation of Christian beliefs but it's also used to "honor and respect heroism." The cross he refers to of course is the one erected 75 years ago in the Mojave Desert to "honor" the dead of the First World War, including those without Christian beliefs; those whose own beliefs were inimitable to and lives diminished by those with Christian beliefs. Yes, Tony, there are and were atheists in foxholes: Jews, Muslims, animists, Unitarians and others -- and no Tony, that cross doesn't salute them be they heroes or clerk-typists: it salutes you and your religion at their expense and mine. It doesn't acknowledge that there are religious people in America, it tells you they're the ones who count most.
"Here, one Latin cross in the desert evokes far more than religion. It evokes thousands of small crosses in foreign fields marking the graves of Americans who fell in battles, battles whose tragedies are compounded if the fallen are forgotten"continued Kennedy hoping apparently that in the passionate flaunting of murky emotional tropes we will forget that the most moving of war memorials contains nothing but names: hoping apparently that you've never been to one of those cemeteries in Europe and seen the graves marked by the Star of David and memorializing bones than didn't fight for or die to uphold Christianity or an allegedly Christian nation. The Desert Cross isn't designed to help us remember anyone but to remember Jesus of the Gospels. Waving a cross in their dead faces isn't designed to be a memento of them, but a proud rebuke toward others and another bit of puffed-up braggadocio in the same fashion as our traditional bully-boy patriotism. We're number one -- and that's because we're Christian.
What Judge Tony is saying here is that they don't matter, they don't deserve to matter; don't deserve the dignity of being buried without alien iconography. What America is hearing is that we can't spare a dime for Public TV but putting up and maintaining Christian symbols on public property is public duty because the United States of America would really be the Christian States of America God wants it to be if we hadn't allowed those people in.
states Justice Steven's dissenting, and historically correct opinion, an opinion soon to retire from the bench. The symbol does not represent the United States, it does not represent all of us or describe what we're about. It does not remind us of the unnecessary and pointless slaughter of the Great War conducted by the Christian kings of Christian nations asserting Christian values. It does not remind us that we have a secular government and we designed it and maintain it to protect our individual beliefs and our right to practice our creeds and sects and religions without government interference and coercion, be it subtle or overt.
"The cross is not a universal symbol of sacrifice. It is the symbol of one particular sacrifice, and that sacrifice carries deeply significant meaning for those who adhere to the Christian faith"
Once again we have been made aware of how precarious is our freedom of conscience, our freedom from interference in our private beliefs and our right to be included as Americans in a state that is under relentless religious pressure to be exclusive. We have a Court willing, it seems, to reevaluate and revisit many things we thought were decided and that would be a great many things indeed if next year's Court leaned more heavily toward giving our government a more religious stance when it comes to matters of morality. We can expect some serious fervor surrounding the next appointment. If you value religious freedom and indeed if you value religion itself, maybe now's the time to pray.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
Blaming Bush
Chris Cillizza reports on an extremely promising poll result:
A new Washington Post/ABC poll suggests that most Americans continue to blame the sluggish economy on former President George W. Bush, a development that could complicate Republican efforts to lay it at President Barack Obama's feet this fall.
Nearly six in ten (59 percent) of those polled said that Bush was to blame for the current state of the economy while 25 percent put the blame on Obama.
Craziest Republican of the Day: Duncan Hunter
The crazy keeps coming.
Speaking at a teabagger rally (aka "tea party") over the weekend, California Rep. Duncan Hunter agreed with a questioner that the children of illegal immigrants who are American citizens should be deported:
You can look and say, "You're a mean guy. That's a mean thing to do. That's not a humanitarian thing to do." We simply cannot afford what we're doing right now.
It's not just mean, it's despicable. What Hunter is saying is that American citizens born in the U.S. should be deported. No matter that it's hardly their fault that their parents were/are in the country illegally. And no matter that they themselves are legally American who likely have never lived anywhere else.
And just for the record, Hunter thinks the draconian Arizona immigration law is "a fantastic starting point." But to what end? Are racial/ethnic profiling and the establishment of a police state not enough?
All the more reason to keep these increasingly crazy Republicans out of power.
**********
In response to Hunter, Paul Krugman is right on the money:
So Rep. Duncan Hunter wants to deport people born in America -- if their parents were illegal immigrants.
As everyone who knows anything about the Constitution knows, this would be unconstitutional: if you were born here, you're a citizen, no matter who your parents were.
But it's not just a matter of the letter of the law: it's about who we are as a nation. What America means to me is a land in which you are judged for yourself -- not by your race, your ethnic origins, or what your parents do. Saying that citizenship depends on whether your parents were here legally crosses a fundamental line; it's not far from there to making all kinds of rights hereditary rather than inherent in the simple fact that you were born in the USA.
It fits in, of course, with the idea that people can be arrested if they aren’t carrying the right papers -- or be implanted involuntarily with microchips.
Anti-immigration fever is deeply un-American -- at least as I understand America.
That's true, and do think these Republicans deserve the un-American tag, but such fever, such nativist zeal, plays very well in Republican America, and there's way too much of that for comfort.
I would also note that for all their supposed fidelity to the original intent of the Founders (as they define it), conservatives certainly like to play fast and loose not just with the spirit of the Constitution but with its very letter. Ultimately, they don't really give a damn. Talking up "original intent" is just a political ploy, a way to come across as fundamentally American (according to their gross misinterpretation of what it means to be American). What they want is power, and, with power, to be able to impose their "America" on America. And that would be an "America" that is deeply un-American, an "America" that is simultaneously libertarian (for the ruling oligarchy) and theocratic (to keep the masses down).
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Standing up to Wall Street and the GOP on financial reform
From our friends at the Senate Democratic Policy Committee:
Senate Democrats Are on Your Side: Standing Up to Republican Obstructionism on Wall Street Reform
Republicans have yet again put their political interests ahead of the well-being of the American people. By refusing to allow debate on Wall Street reform, they have sent a clear message: Senate Republicans are on the side of big banks and Wall Street CEOs. This disingenuous, obstructionist attitude was set in motion last month after Senate Republicans met behind closed doors with the CEOs of big banks. They returned and promptly started trying to water down legislation that would rein in corporate greed and excess on Wall Street.
Senate Democrats want to restore accountability and transparency to Wall Street, and have brought forward historic reform legislation to protect American consumers, investors and businesses from the greed and recklessness that brought our economy to the brink of collapse. The Restoring American Financial Stability Act puts in place the strongest consumer financial protections ever and will help put a stop to the reckless behavior that cost Americans over 8 million jobs and trillions of dollars in savings.
By choosing to side with Wall Street over the American people, Republicans have voted against legislation that will:
· End Taxpayer Bailouts. As long as giant financial firms believe the government will bail them out if they get into trouble, they only have the incentive to get larger and take bigger risks. This bill guarantees that taxpayers will never again be forced to bail out reckless Wall Street firms by creating a safe orderly liquidation mechanism for the FDIC to unwind failing significant financial companies; shareholders and unsecured creditors will bear losses; and management will be removed.
· End "Too Big To Fail." The bill provides for strict new capital, leverage, liquidity, risk management and other requirements as companies grow in size and complexity, with significant requirements on companies that pose risks to the financial system. The Federal Reserve will be authorized, as a last resort, to require a large complex company, to divest some of its holdings if it poses a grave threat to the financial stability of the United States.
· Put a New Cop on The Beat. The bill establishes the Financial Stability Oversight Council to focus on identifying, monitoring and addressing systemic risks posed by large, complex financial firms as well as products and activities that spread risk across firms.
· Bring Sunlight and Transparency to Shadowy Markets. The legislation eliminates loopholes that allow risky and abusive practices to go unnoticed and unregulated – including loopholes for over-the-counter derivatives, asset-backed securities, hedge funds, mortgage brokers and payday lenders.
· Guarantee Clear Information in Plain English. The bill creates the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which will have the sole job of protecting American consumers from unfair, deceptive and abusive financial products and practices and will ensure people get the clear information they need on loans and other financial products from credit card companies, mortgage brokers, banks and others.
· Protect Against Bernie Madoff-Type Scams. The SEC has failed to perform aggressive oversight and is unable to understand some of the very companies it is supposed to regulate. This bill creates a program within the SEC to encourage people to report securities violations and mandates an annual assessment of the SEC's internal supervisory controls. The bill also establishes a new Office of Credit Rating Agencies at the SEC to strengthen regulation of credit rating agencies, many of which failed in the past to warn people about risks hidden throughout layers of complex structures.
Craziest Republican of the Day: Pat Bertroche
This is the third CRD post in two days. Overkill? Hardly. Republicans are providing us with an astonishing amount of material, and it's not that there are too many of these posts, it's that there are too few. What can I say? It's tough to keep up.
Yesterday it was Leo Berman and Kristia Cavere. Today it's Pat Bertroche. To be fair, these three are hardly household names. Only Berman is a political officeholder, a state representative in Texas. Cavere, a Tea Party favorrite, is running for the GOP nomination in NY-19, and Bertroche is doing the same in Iowa's 3rd.
But even if they don't have the stature of, say, a Mitch McConnell or a John Boehner, they're still Republicans and they're still incredibly crazy.
Here's what Bertroche, a doctor, said recently at a Republican forum in Tama County, Iowa:
I think we should catch 'em, we should document 'em, make sure we know where they are and where they are going. I actually support microchipping them. I can microchip my dog so I can find it. Why can't I microchip an illegal? That's not a popular thing to say, but it's a lot cheaper than building a fence they can tunnel under.
Read that again, just you catch the full impact.
That's right, Bertroche is saying that illegal immigrants -- men, women, children -- should be microchipped like dogs. No, that's certainly not a popular thing to say, but it's something a Republican can get away with.
These days, as you know, the Party of (Hell) No likes to think of itself as the Party of Freedom, promoting unrestrained liberty (for the rich and privileged). What it is really, it would seem, is the Party of Fascism, the party of draconian anti-immigrant laws, the party of nativism, the party of freedom for the select few (like the guys who run Goldman Sachs) and obedience for the rest, the party of a sort of laissez faire capitalist police state.
No, Bertroche doesn't speak for the party, and I suspect that many Republicans would find his fascist-like extremism (even by their standards) unpalatable, if not downright offensive. But, again, this is the party of a law in Arizona, supported by the likes of Bill Kristol (a Jew who should know better, given what happened back in the '30s and '40s in Germany and elsewhere, and what has happened to Jews throughout history), that will allow police to target (even vaguely) suspected illegal immigrants through racial and ethnic profiling, that will require even legal immigrants (and even American citizens) to carry identification papers.
GOP ready for FinReg cave
By Creature
It may not be today, but it will be soon. Kudos to Harry Reid for forcing these votes. Now, I can't help but think if the Dems had forced votes on health care reform last summer the ugly over the bill would never had time to percolate. Oh well, live and learn.
Update: The cave is today. Wow. Let the debate begin.
It may not be today, but it will be soon. Kudos to Harry Reid for forcing these votes. Now, I can't help but think if the Dems had forced votes on health care reform last summer the ugly over the bill would never had time to percolate. Oh well, live and learn.
Update: The cave is today. Wow. Let the debate begin.
Arizona follows up draconian immigration law with draconian abortion law
It's not just Oklahoma. These days, Arizona seems to be the state taking the lead pushing a far-right, hard-right agenda: Here's TP's Igor Volsky with the ugly details:
The nation is rightly focused on Arizona's draconian new immigration law, but Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) -- who is running for her first full term in office this year -- has just signed another regressive bill that could severely restrict women's access to abortion coverage.On Saturday, "at the Center for Arizona Policy Family dinner before 1600 guests," Brewer signed SB 1305, the first-in-the nation bill that would prohibit insurers in the state-run health care exchange "from providing coverage for abortions unless the coverage is offered as a separate optional rider for which an additional insurance premium is charged."The new Arizona law is a radical mini Stupak. It prevents insurers from offering abortion services, except under the most extreme circumstances, even if only private money were used to pay for those services. Most if not all women in the exchange would only be able to purchase coverage through an impractical, separate abortion "rider" or leave the exchange entirely and find coverage in the shrinking individual health insurance market. Since it's unlikely that many insurers will offer abortion riders or that women will purchase them in anticipation of needing an abortion -- in fact, "in the five states where abortion riders are currently required, no insurance company offers them" -- the Arizona law will severely disadvantage poorer women who would likely have to pay out of pocket for abortion services.Many other states are considering similar bans, but only Arizona has the distinction of leading the nation in adopting the most conservative social policies.
Oh, and you can carry concealed weapons without a permit (like in Alaska and, oddly enough, Vermont). More and more, Arizona is making states like Oklahoma look sane -- and that's a state that has the crazy combo of Inhofe and Coburn in the Senate.
Next up? Book burnings in Glendale!
Quote of the Day: Linda Greenhouse on Arizona's new immigration law
From the "Opinionator" blog at the Times:
I'm glad I've already seen the Grand Canyon.
Because I'm not going back to Arizona as long as it remains a police state, which is what the appalling anti-immigrant bill that Gov. Jan Brewer signed into law last week has turned it into.
*****
The intent of the new Arizona law, according to the State Legislature, is "attrition through enforcement." Breathing while undocumented, without a civil liberties lawyer at hand, is now a perilous activity anywhere in Arizona.
Apple validates our scoop on the iSqueal!
By J. Thomas Duffy
Who knew we would be so prophetic?
On multiple fronts.
First there was the minor fun we had, with the Little Lost iPhone last week, in our 'The iPhone That Knew Too Much', running a wisp of a thread of the classic Hitchcock film in it.
After dismissing that "Redwood City (California) will never, ever, ever be mistaken for in Marrakesh", we had this breaking news;
Police Seize Jason Chen's Computers
Holy Handcuffs Batman!
Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team?
Do they actually have lightening-quick robots that go out, paralyze people, that drag them back to Apple HQ for an under-the-burning LED interrogation?
Apple asked for 'lost' iPhone criminal probe
WOW!
When we said "Apple is, notoriously like The Yakuza, we had no idea they had a man on the inside.
Katie Marsal has more on that end of things.
Now, we have a cavalcade of legal circus acts to play out.
And this peaked our interest;
Apple May Have Traced iPhone to Finder’s Address
Hmmm ...
How did they know where to go?
Could they really trace it, and/or, did they get a tip?
That brings us square into a scoop we had, way back, in March of 2005;
Apple, unofficially, has validated the iSqueal!
We'll have to wait and see what else breaks with this case.
In the meantime, we'll let Andrew Leonard, of Salon, close us out, from his 'Steve Jobs' iPhone police state';
(Cross Posted at The Garlic)
Who knew we would be so prophetic?
On multiple fronts.
First there was the minor fun we had, with the Little Lost iPhone last week, in our 'The iPhone That Knew Too Much', running a wisp of a thread of the classic Hitchcock film in it.
After dismissing that "Redwood City (California) will never, ever, ever be mistaken for in Marrakesh", we had this breaking news;
Police Seize Jason Chen's Computers
Last Friday night, California's Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team entered editor Jason Chen's home without him present, seizing four computers and two servers. They did so using a warrant by Judge of Superior Court of San Mateo. According to Gaby Darbyshire, COO of Gawker Media LLC, the search warrant to remove these computers was invalid under section 1524(g) of the California Penal Code.
Holy Handcuffs Batman!
Rapid Enforcement Allied Computer Team?
Do they actually have lightening-quick robots that go out, paralyze people, that drag them back to Apple HQ for an under-the-burning LED interrogation?
Apple asked for 'lost' iPhone criminal probe
The criminal investigation into the purported theft of an apparent iPhone prototype came at the request of Apple Inc., officials said Tuesday.
[snip]
Wagstaffe said that an outside counsel for Apple, along with Apple engineer Powell, called the District Attorney’s office on Wednesday or Thursday of last week to report a theft had occurred and they wanted it investigated. The District Attorney’s office then referred them to the Rapid Enforcement and Allied Computer Team, or REACT, a multi-jurisdictional, high-tech crime task force that operates under the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s office.
REACT then sought out the warrant that was served on the home of Gizmodo writer Jason Chen, seizing several computers, a server and external hard drives, as well as copies of Chen’s paystubs and his American Express bill. The warrant was served on April 23 while Chen and his wife were out of the house, leading investigators to break down his door and conduct the search.
[snip]
Apple is on the steering committee of REACT along with 24 other Silicon Valley companies including Microsoft Corp., Adobe Systems Inc., Symantec Corp., KLA-Tencor Inc., Applied Materials Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. The committee acts as a liaison between the region’s tech industry and law enforcement
WOW!
When we said "Apple is, notoriously like The Yakuza, we had no idea they had a man on the inside.
Katie Marsal has more on that end of things.
Now, we have a cavalcade of legal circus acts to play out.
And this peaked our interest;
Apple May Have Traced iPhone to Finder’s Address
People identifying themselves as representing Apple last week visited and sought permission to search the Silicon Valley address of the college-age man who came into possession of a next-generation iPhone prototype, according to a person involved with the find.
“Someone came to [the finder's] house and knocked on his door,” the source told Wired.com, speaking on condition of anonymity because the case is under investigation by the police. A roommate answered, but wouldn’t let them in.
Hmmm ...
How did they know where to go?
Could they really trace it, and/or, did they get a tip?
That brings us square into a scoop we had, way back, in March of 2005;
Apple will also set up a special hotline - iSqueal - for people to phone or email in tips as to who may be leaking, or disparaging Apple or any Apple products.
Changes will be coming with iTunes as well. The purchase price will remain at .99, for those willing to sign a contract that they will not badmouth Apple. Otherwise, the purchase of a tune will cost $99 and Apple will create a dossier on that purchaser and monitor there actions and communications.
Ipods will now be outfitted with special senors to detect a batch of keywords related to dissent about Apple. If any of these keywords are used, the iPod shuts down, and sends a signal - much like a Lojack - for Apple to dispatch a lawyer to serve the iPod owner with a lawsuit.
Apple, unofficially, has validated the iSqueal!
We'll have to wait and see what else breaks with this case.
In the meantime, we'll let Andrew Leonard, of Salon, close us out, from his 'Steve Jobs' iPhone police state';
No one ends up looking good in this mess. Steve Jobs is a control freak with police powers. Apple employees don't know how to take care of super-secret prototypes! Finders of lost iPhones are perfectly happy to sell them to on-the-make media outlets. And the pursuit of the page-view jackpot turns reporters into black market entrepreneurs. It's a wonderful world.
(Cross Posted at The Garlic)
Just how insane and extremist is Arizona's new immigration law?
Right-wing favourite and presumptive Florida GOP Senate nominee Marco Rubio has "concerns," which is saying a lot.
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush thinks it "creates unintended consequences" and isn't "the proper approach."
George W. Bush "brain" and "turd blossom" Karl Rove predicts there are "going to be some constitutional problems with the bill."
In contrast, many others on the right, such as Bill Kristol and George Will, are behind Arizona all the way and think it's a great and necessary move, and so it's not like conservative opposition to the law is widespread. Indeed, even the opposition to it has generally been muted, carefully crafted to express disappointment while not taking issue with the Republican approach to immigration generally.
It is rather hypocritical, not to mention downright appalling, that a party and a movement that smear Obama with socialist and fascist labels and claim to be defending freedom are in fact interested only in freedom for a select few, or more broadly for their own kind. A few high-profile exceptions notwithstanding, their enthusiastic support for what amounts to an American form of fascism is telling.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Drop that Chalupa, Pedro
By Capt. Fogg
When those cold war movies I grew up on wanted to let you know the scene was not in the land of the free, we were furnished with Angst ridden scenes where the protagonist was asked for his papers by someone in a leather trench coat on some dark street corner. Maybe his accent was showing, the cut of his clothes -- maybe it was just routine, but we were all grateful that back here, in "freedom" we could go about our business without worry and the government was on our side.
The strangest thing about Arizona's new knee jerk immigration law is that Arizona is the spiritual home of small-government libertarianism and the feeling that Government is a necessary evil; perhaps more evil than necessary. They don't want the government telling them when and where or if they can keep and bear and conceal weapons, what they can eat, smoke or drink or what they can do on their property. They don't trust public education or public radio and they sure as hell don't want to pay for them. I suspect they'd raise holy hell if the police were to stop them at random looking for contraband or illegal weapons or even a drivers license, yet they're apparently quite happy to demand that anyone "suspicious" in that state must keep proof of citizenship on their person at all times, display such proof to any cop that feels like demanding it, or face serious consequences. Of course, if you're white, you're probably all right, so never mind.
To any unbiased observer this alone would more than hint of a police state and unconstitutional government interference in private life.
Sure, if the Arizona police were perfect human beings there would be little concern, but they're far from that. Still, those self-styled Libertarians seem quite happy to give unprecedented and perhaps unconstitutional power to Law enforcement to stop people and demand papers. It's pretty hard to maintain the pose of strict constitutional limits on government when the power reserved for the judicial branch is given to a cop on the beat. The various issues surrounding protecting citizens from government powers of search and seizure were a cornerstone of our rebellion against British rule -- as I shouldn't have to remind anyone.
Dare I speculate that the Libertarian label might, for a great many people, sometimes be only the phony ID that authoritarianism carries?
Evidently fear of aliens overrides high principle and what Arizona really wants is a government that cuts a swath through the law to root out what they want rooted out -- and the Constitution be damned. What they want is a government that lays it's fingers heavily on people they don't like and lays completely off anything that stands between them and whatever they please. Sorry cowboy; when you add in the racist element, this situational Libertarianism is too much like Fascism to make it worth trying to find a difference.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
When those cold war movies I grew up on wanted to let you know the scene was not in the land of the free, we were furnished with Angst ridden scenes where the protagonist was asked for his papers by someone in a leather trench coat on some dark street corner. Maybe his accent was showing, the cut of his clothes -- maybe it was just routine, but we were all grateful that back here, in "freedom" we could go about our business without worry and the government was on our side.
The strangest thing about Arizona's new knee jerk immigration law is that Arizona is the spiritual home of small-government libertarianism and the feeling that Government is a necessary evil; perhaps more evil than necessary. They don't want the government telling them when and where or if they can keep and bear and conceal weapons, what they can eat, smoke or drink or what they can do on their property. They don't trust public education or public radio and they sure as hell don't want to pay for them. I suspect they'd raise holy hell if the police were to stop them at random looking for contraband or illegal weapons or even a drivers license, yet they're apparently quite happy to demand that anyone "suspicious" in that state must keep proof of citizenship on their person at all times, display such proof to any cop that feels like demanding it, or face serious consequences. Of course, if you're white, you're probably all right, so never mind.
To any unbiased observer this alone would more than hint of a police state and unconstitutional government interference in private life.
Sure, if the Arizona police were perfect human beings there would be little concern, but they're far from that. Still, those self-styled Libertarians seem quite happy to give unprecedented and perhaps unconstitutional power to Law enforcement to stop people and demand papers. It's pretty hard to maintain the pose of strict constitutional limits on government when the power reserved for the judicial branch is given to a cop on the beat. The various issues surrounding protecting citizens from government powers of search and seizure were a cornerstone of our rebellion against British rule -- as I shouldn't have to remind anyone.
Dare I speculate that the Libertarian label might, for a great many people, sometimes be only the phony ID that authoritarianism carries?
Evidently fear of aliens overrides high principle and what Arizona really wants is a government that cuts a swath through the law to root out what they want rooted out -- and the Constitution be damned. What they want is a government that lays it's fingers heavily on people they don't like and lays completely off anything that stands between them and whatever they please. Sorry cowboy; when you add in the racist element, this situational Libertarianism is too much like Fascism to make it worth trying to find a difference.
(Cross posted from Human Voices)
adana full med
megaupload
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CNU6QT91
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=6VGMF3MF
rapidshare
http://rapidshare.com/files/380745657/adana_full_med.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/380745339/adana_full_med.part2.rar
hotfile
http://hotfile.com/dl/40158457/58d7d9f/adana_full_med.part1.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/40158602/b1c0f84/adana_full_med.part2.rar.html
medium
Megaupload
Click to Download! 41.37 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 43.37 MB
Hotfile
Click to Download! 41.4 MB
Adana Spanked and Abused
Megaupload
Click to Download! 52.7 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 55.26 MB
Hotfile
Click to Download! 52.7 MB
Adana She Got Switched
Megaupload
Click to Download! 99.88 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 104.72 MB
Hotfile
Click to Download! 99.9 MB
Adana Real Blowjob Auditions
Megaupload
Click to Download! 28.43 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 2981
Hotfile
Click to Download! 28.4 MB
Adana Leash Sex
Megaupload
Click to Download! 84.92 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 89.04 MB
Hotfile
Click to Download! 84.9 MB
Adana Jake
Megaupload
Click to download! 67.56 MB
Rapidshare
Click to download! 70.83 MB
Hotfile
Click to download! 67.6 MB
Adana Her First DV
Megaupload
Click to Download! 117.69 MB
Rapidshare
Click to Download! 123.40 MB
Hotfile
Click to Download! 117.7 MB
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
